Op-Ed – The Round Tablehttp://beloitcollegeroundtable.com
Mon, 19 Nov 2018 18:00:06 +0000en-UShourly1https://wordpress.org/?v=4.9.8https://i0.wp.com/beloitcollegeroundtable.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/cropped-rsz_rt_logo_2-1.jpg?fit=32%2C32Op-Ed – The Round Tablehttp://beloitcollegeroundtable.com
3232116665743Rock County Cannabis Referendumhttp://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/11/05/rock-county-cannabis-referendum/
http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/11/05/rock-county-cannabis-referendum/#respondMon, 05 Nov 2018 18:00:10 +0000http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/?p=2743On this November 6 election day, Rock County voters will be asked to vote for more than just their state representative or senator. This election, voters will be asked “Should cannabis be legalized for adult use, taxed and regulated like alcohol, with the proceeds from the taxes used for education, healthcare, and infrastructure?” according to My Vote Wisconsin.

The Rock County Cannabis Referendum was voted to be on the ballot back in June, but the buzz has finally come out now that election day is so close. Some believe this was only a trick intended to get the younger voters out to the polls, but any way to get more voters and voices heard is what we all should want.

Looking at this from a Beloiter, and once a begrudged Peet Rat’s, point of view there are extremely clear reasons in which one should vote in favor for the legalization. At Beloit, this would only bring down the number of drug-related referrals, which was a whopping 113 referrals back in 2017, and possibly bring up the enrollment numbers. Who knows what kind of regulations the college will make on the usage, but the first step into that conversation, and the possibility of less referrals, starts with this referendum.

In all seriousness, a state where cannabis is legalized is a major selling point for some college kids. A lot of prospective students know better than to base their school of choice off policies like this, but it also doesn’t hurt if cannabis policies swing the same way they do. Ever since the drinking philosophy came to be a policy, the overall atmosphere and happiness of Beloit students has gone down substantially. There’s nothing that makes Beloit “weird” anymore.

Other non-Beloit College students have also thought that the referendum could be useful. Not only would it burst the State of Wisconsin’s revenue up about $138 million, but supporters also say that it could calm down the opioid scene in Rock County; using the marijuana as a substitute and the revenue to help those still suffering from addiction.

In other states, we have seen how the legalization of cannabis has improved overall crime rates in addition to their economic state.

Recreational marijuana in the United States is available in nine states, while another 31 have made medical marijuana legal for their constituents. According to the Denver Post, Pueblo County, Colorado found that in a report formulated by the Colorado State University-Pueblo’s Institute of Cannabis Research, “Researchers found that a taxed and regulated cannabis industry contributed more than $58 million to the local economy.”

The vote will obviously not make the whole state “potheads” overnight. The process will be a little longer, this vote is only technically to show that Rock County is in support of the legalization in the state of Wisconsin. Only Wisconsin state legislatures could make this possible.

I truly believe that the legalization of marijuana in Wisconsin will bring nothing but positives to the table. Although it may take some time to fully get there, your voice matters now. When you get to the part on your ballot, be sure to vote yes for the Rock County Cannabis Referendum. All past, present and future Peet Rats will thank you.

]]>http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/11/05/rock-county-cannabis-referendum/feed/02743Warren’s DNA Test Plays Into Trump’s Handhttp://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/10/30/warrens-dna-test-plays-into-trumps-hand/
http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/10/30/warrens-dna-test-plays-into-trumps-hand/#respondTue, 30 Oct 2018 17:00:54 +0000http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/?p=2711To be frank, it is a mistake to presume facts still matter. That the Democratic Party continues to behave as though they do is a serious tactical blind spot, and indicative of a failure to grasp the political reality in which we currently live.

Last week, Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren released the results of a DNA test, proving that she is between 1/64th and 1/1,024th Native American. This came in response to a year-old taunt from President Trump, who accused Warren of having made up the detail about her ancestry. Trump has since referred to Warren as “Pocahontas.” The president went so far as to promise that he would donate $1 million to a charity of the senator’s choice should she prove her Native American ancestry.

Trump’s bullying tactics should not surprise anyone. It’s the same strategy he’s been employing for years now, since the earliest days of his campaign. Trump has a history of making reckless accusations, of ridiculing and insulting his opponents. Disrespect is the president’s brand, second only to flat-out denial.

Warren and her team ostensibly hoped that by releasing evidence that she was telling the truth, that Warren did have Native American ancestry, and that the president had been wrong to call her a liar, they would frame Trump as a liar and Warren as a defender of truth. If all went extraordinarily well, Trump would face enough backlash from the media that he’d have to donate the $1 million promised. If he refused, the move would surely damage his image, highlight his inconsistencies, and make him look foolish in the face of reality. After all, Trump was wrong. They caught him being wrong.

Trump’s response was a familiar one.

“Who cares, who cares?” The president said in response to the DNA results and the $1 million he’d promised. “I didn’t say that. You better read it again.”

This all sounds eerily familiar, and that’s because some iteration of this scenario has played out over and over since Trump announced his candidacy in 2015. Trump has said a lot of things over the years, and a great deal of them have been inconsistent with statements and tweets he’s said previously, while still others have been outright lies. None of that has mattered. The truth does not matter to Trump. He is the president of the post-fact age.

As such, fighting him with facts is a tired and useless gesture to a time that no longer exists. There no longer exists a national consensus on what is and is not real. Reality, after all, is perception. Objectivity, in its truest sense, exists outside of human understanding. What we believe is based on how we are trained to understand what’s presented to us on a second-to-second basis. What matters now is the framing of ideas, understood within the context of a language game that’s objective is to spread a worldview to as many people as possible, even if they believe it false.

Warren played directly into Trump’s hand by responding to his taunts. Her DNA test results don’t rebuke Trump’s words. They give them more power. They make his taunts look incisive enough to provoke a response from Warren, and that in turn makes her appear wounded and small.

Conversely, Trump appears above it all. He can brush it off like everything else he’s been caught on. Warren being a small percentage Native American does not matter to him, or anyone. It’s a symbolic move that does next to nothing.

If Trump being caught in a lie (or an insulting comment, a false claim or even a serious crime) mattered, he would not have been elected in 2016. He would not have a consistent approval rating within his base. He would not have just succeeded in consolidating personal power within the Supreme Court.

Opposing Trump in the present moment means being nuanced and decisive. It means articulating a clear set of values and then spreading them to as many people as possible. It means understanding that the Internet is made up of ideologically extreme rabbit holes, and that anyone can take any fact and make it fit what they want to feel, or disregard them altogether. It means understanding that reality is not what it used to be, and likely never will be again.

Elizabeth Warren should not run for President in 2020. The Democrats need a candidate who can navigate the current climate with tact and consequence. It is not 2015 anymore. We’re in a different reality now. Evidence of the past is of little relevance.

]]>http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/10/30/warrens-dna-test-plays-into-trumps-hand/feed/02711It’s Halloween and You Know What That Means: Stop Wearing Other People’s Cultureshttp://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/10/29/its-halloween-and-you-know-what-that-means-stop-wearing-other-peoples-cultures/
http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/10/29/its-halloween-and-you-know-what-that-means-stop-wearing-other-peoples-cultures/#respondMon, 29 Oct 2018 17:00:38 +0000http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/?p=2705Every year on Halloween we see it: the white girl dressing up as Pocahontas with braids, feathers in her hair and moccasins; the frat guy wearing a sombrero, mustache and shaking maracas; and the Cleopatra get-up with eyeliner cat-eyes and a long white robe. Costumes that stereotype cultures out of amusement and laziness appear every year on Halloween, not to mention long-dead discussions of blackface popping up on NBC and outfits depicting heavily misogynistic and sexualized themes being imposed on young audiences. Donning another identities’ culture for a night of drinking and fun might sound harmless to the ignorant and uneducated reader, but being able to shed the marginalization and discrimination that these groups face every day reveals the privilege and racism that perseveres in our predominately white culture.

Unlike someone of Mexican heritage, the white party-goers with sombreros and maracas can take off this costume and return to their state of whiteness, free of the discrimination that those with darker skin face every day. Wearing outfits that stereotype and degrade these cultures into the racist ideas white people have ingrained in our society with no actual understanding of the nuanced identities one is actually harming is “conduct that presents white people as normal while presenting other groups as exotic … [and] is racist,” as Osamudia James, professor and vice dean at the University of Miami School of Law, wrote for the Washington Post. To make it simple: do not dress up as a minority identity that is not your own this Halloween, or ever.

The conversation can get sticky. Recently, one of my female friends, who is Mexican-American, asked me if I thought it would culturally insensitive for her to dress up as Pocahontas, since Native Americans and Mexican Americans are both minority groups and their skin color is not too far off. However, Native Americans suffered a mass genocide at the hands of white settlers that completely obliterated many tribes and populations, as well as a mass deportation to reservations when white Anglo-Saxons stole their lands and attempted to make them conform to a Western society. Pocahontas herself was kidnapped and dragged aboard a vessel bound for England in her teenage years, where she was used as a pawn for the English and forced to abandon her traditions in favor of Christian values. Combining stereotypical ideas of what a Native American woman might have looked like (putting aside the fact that there are thousands of different cultures within indigenous groups with their own culture and spiritualities) and using it to portray a real-life victim of rape and imperialism is red-face and completely unacceptable. And the “sexy” version of these costumes are even worse, making jokes of the deeply-rooted sexism of a minority group with the highest rate of sexual assault and domestic violence in the nation.

Other ideas for Halloween costumes: a ghost a la Casey Affleck in A Ghost Story, the beloved David S. Pumpkins, a funny pop culture character from your own race (for white guys Napoleon Dynamite, Bob Ross, and Morty Smith are go-tos), avocado toast, a banana, or a crayon. If you dress up as another culture’s stereotype, or a race that is not your own this Halloween, be prepared to be called out and asked why you did not take the time to crack open this paper and skim this article, or why you did and then decided not to care with your smug “the left has taken political correctness too far” mindset. The answer is: you are racist. Be prepared to accept that about yourself.

]]>http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/10/29/its-halloween-and-you-know-what-that-means-stop-wearing-other-peoples-cultures/feed/02705Truk’t: Bang for your buk’t?http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/10/29/trukt-bang-for-your-bukt/
http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/10/29/trukt-bang-for-your-bukt/#respondMon, 29 Oct 2018 17:00:04 +0000http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/?p=2708Stepping under the emerald lights and enveloped in the velvet wallpaper, Truk’t and its friendly workers immediately welcome you into their bustling bar and restaurant.

With a menu made for tequila and taco lovers, your taste buds are in for a tasty surprise. We started off the night with the house favorite, and house-made, guacamole. We chose the guacamole with mango habanero relish atop. The roasted mango and nuts on top of the avocado spread was a delish touch that added the right amount of flavor, without too much spice. We were warned by our server, Margaret Sheils ‘19, that the spicy pineapple sure did live up to its name so we were content without our mango.

As for drinks, Charlotte Mahoney Mosedale ‘19 stepped in as the drink connoisseur for the evening. The Cucumber Cilantro Margarita, also recommended by Shiels, was mixed with Corazon Blanco Tequila, Luxardo Triplum, fresh cucumber, fresh lime and cilantro and was a refreshing sip in between mouthfuls of homemade guacamole.

When it came time for tacos, it was pleasantly difficult to choose from the nine choices of tacos, all wrapped inside a handmade corn tortilla and served on an industrial platter. An instant favorite was the brussel sprout taco that had delicate sprouts and cheese to make a delicious meatless taco. Another favorite was the pork belly breakfast that had a strip of pork belly and poached eggs plopped onto a tortilla. A bite into the mess was worth the barbeque stain and egg drip.

When it came to dessert, the churros are a must. Although their oil-fried and muddled appearance left me apprehensive, the taste did not disappoint. Fried on the spot, they came out steaming and were served with a cool, thick chocolate sauce that complimented the cinnamon and sugar dipped treats perfectly.

The overall price for the quality and amount was fairly reasonable and easily feasible for a college student’s budget. Where the menu gets pricey is within the extensive drink menu, most signature drinks start out at $10. All tacos are within the $4-$6 range depending on the fillings and are all wrapped up in those warm, homemade tortillas.

Overall, the joint is a great addition to the up and coming restaurant scene in Downtown Beloit. Good prices and good food at a prime location; there is much success to come to Beloit’s latest addition.

]]>http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/10/29/trukt-bang-for-your-bukt/feed/02708Commons and DKs work incredibly hard to provide us foodhttp://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/10/11/commons-and-dks-work-incredibly-hard-to-provide-us-food/
http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/10/11/commons-and-dks-work-incredibly-hard-to-provide-us-food/#respondThu, 11 Oct 2018 22:48:00 +0000http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/?p=2679Midterms are a time when students are both reflecting on everything they have learned so far and what their experience has been like so far in the semester. Many aspects of students day-to-day life have changed slightly since budget cuts affected the college this year. Students who are on the all-flex meal plan used to rely heavily on DKs suppers for their meal, but now that DKs has closed after lunch, they either have to make their own meals or use the flex-option at Commons.

Most students who were on the all-flex plan were initially upset by the change, but have since adapted to eating at Commons. However, I think most would agree that they would still prefer DKs. Personally, I loved being able to order something and have it be hot and fresh and just how I like it, but I also understand the constraints being put on Bon Appetit right now.

There was recently some hot discourse in the student group about the quality of food in both Commons and DKs. Students have complained about the quality of food in the past, both taste-wise and safety-wise. Most recently, there were complaints of moldy bread and fruit in DKs. In the past, there have been reports of undercooked and unappetizing meals from Commons.

I can completely get behind wanting safe food to eat, but in all of these cases, when others asked what the response of workers at DKs and Commons did, the responses seemed adequate. Employees gave those people new food that wasn’t moldy or rotten like the stuff before was. I understand that they may need a new sorting or dating system in order to catch these problems earlier, but that still won’t solve the problem.

I’ve worked in food service for five years now and I can tell you that there is no possible way that a place serving the sheer volume of students we have with the number of staff DKs and Commons has can catch every single piece of food that has gotten too old. When food comes in, the amount of time it has been made or picked is already varying quite a lot. In addition to that, there are so many products that come out of DKs and Commons that it is extremely hard to date them all and check everything every day.

Once again, it is perfectly understandable to want food that won’t make you sick, but it is not fair to take out this anger at the staff and students on campus. Beloit College has had to use the least expensive plan that Bon Appetit offers, and the food reflects this. The College has said that if students wanted to be on the more expensive plans, then we as students would have to pay more for our meal plans. This seems pretty reasonable, but I can’t help but wonder how other schools roughly our size seem to have better food but the same sticker price as Beloit. Which part of our tuition is more expensive than theirs? Why can’t we have the same quality of food they do?

I also want to take some space here to really applaud the food service employees at Beloit College. I have seen them all work extremely hard to take care of our food needs in a timely and efficient manner. They get a lot of criticism from the students, but they come every day to ensure that we are able to have food to eat. They handle complaints efficiently and are always open to hearing student input and taking that into consideration. They’ve been open to meeting with students, and have come on their own free time to host students and meet with us about meal options and food that we want to see at Beloit College.

I’m upset about DKs no longer serving supper, but I’m not exactly heartbroken about it. There are still meal options on campus, they may be further away which is an inconvenience, but the food at Commons will still serve the same purpose as DKs. I think we largely under appreciate those who are willing to come in early and stay late to ensure our needs are met. Next time you want to criticize DKs or Commons on social media, maybe consider sending a concerned email first.

]]>http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/10/11/commons-and-dks-work-incredibly-hard-to-provide-us-food/feed/02679Meet the horrifying new mascot for the Philadelphia Flyers: Grittyhttp://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/10/11/meet-the-horrifying-new-mascot-for-the-philadelphia-flyers-gritty/
http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/10/11/meet-the-horrifying-new-mascot-for-the-philadelphia-flyers-gritty/#respondThu, 11 Oct 2018 22:41:56 +0000http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/?p=2673Like a cross between Maurice Sendak drawing, a monster from Chinese mythology, and LA Dodgers third baseman Justin Turner, Philadelphia Flyers mascot Gritty has arrived. The first Flyers mascot since their 1976 representative, Slapshot (not to be confused with the current Washington Capitals mascot), leaving the NY Rangers the lone NHL team without a mascot. Gritty. The mascot for one of the nastiest sports team in history, Gritty’s hideously terrifying complexion perfectly reflects the city from which he hails. His eyes flail about, as if independent from his consciousness, and he can’t even skate. In fact, moments after the first time he publicly set foot on the ice at Wells Fargo Center in Philadelphia, he fell, helmet over skates, barely managing to keep hold of his t-shirt gun. According to a statement from the NHL, the great beast is often caught eating snow straight from the Zamboni, after scarfing down hot dog after hot dog, filling the bottomless pit he calls a stomach with greasy stadium food, and snow drenched with the blood and sweat of muscular, toothless Russians.

Philadelphia as a city is not unfamiliar with monstrous mascots, as emphasized by the mascot for their baseball team, the Philly Phanatic. The green mascot’s thirty-year tenure has been marred by incidents involving hot dog cannon face shots and brawls due to the excessive mocking of coaches and players. But Philadelphia is not alone in this string for Gritty is just another link in the chain of strange mascots appearing in recent years. In February, New Orleans Pelicans mascot, King Cake Baby, began terrifying fans, reporters and players alike. While doing his best to “entertain” during a rain delay, he danced, with his bulging eyes staring down the crowd, before he turned his gaze to the broadcasting room where he slowly walked towards the reporters behind the desk, like a villain in a horror film.

Fans of the Flyers have taken to Gritty, quickly turning him into an internet meme by photoshopping him into the background of photos, allowing him to fully express his shifty appearance. Gritty responded to this increased attention by increasing his Twitter presence, even threatening to kill fellow NHL mascot, the Pittsburgh Penguin within a day of existing.

I speak from experience, because I am a former mascot. For four years in high school, I was Obie The Obezag, mascot for The Key School in Annapolis, MD. That’s right, once a week I would dress up as a giant gazebo with arms and hamburger helper hands, to cheer on my school’s sports team. So trust me when I say, I know what a bad mascot is, and Gritty is at the top of that list.

]]>http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/10/11/meet-the-horrifying-new-mascot-for-the-philadelphia-flyers-gritty/feed/02673The Appropriate Response: When Should Professors Involve Themselves In Student Debates?http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/10/09/the-appropriate-response-when-should-professors-involve-themselves-in-student-debates/
http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/10/09/the-appropriate-response-when-should-professors-involve-themselves-in-student-debates/#respondTue, 09 Oct 2018 18:34:05 +0000http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/?p=2668As more and more colleges are beginning to integrate discussion based curricula into their majors, the era of the dreadfully dull lecture hall is coming to an end. I think I speak for quite a few of us when I say, good riddance. However, this new curriculum format is not without its issues either. Now that the professor is no longer devising entire lectures, we have to consider what role the professor should take on in this new format. Are they asking the questions? Are they directing the discussion in specific ways? Should they even be involved in student discussion or should they simply be present?

Personally, I believe that professors have three roles in student discussions: to be a facilitator, a mediator and a teacher.

There are very few debates that don’t have at least one lull that carries on until someone decides to finally end it. As a facilitator, the professor has full permission to be that person. As the discussion is there to help enhance student comprehension, it stands to reason that awkward silence isn’t getting the job done. So, to ensure continued lively discussion, a professor can ask a question or pose a scenario for students to think about and then speak on if they so choose. In this way, the professor is still leaving the discussion in the hands of the students. They’re not dictating the flow of conversation but simply trying to encourage it. The professor’s only goal is to revitalize a flagging conversation, not to push students into a discussion they don’t care for.

Another common part of debates is that sometimes the people involved can become quite heated. This is when a professor can step in as a mediator. No class should ever become hostile and it is a professor’s job to make absolutely sure of that. As such, the professor should make sure to be aware of when a discussion is beginning to be less than friendly. They don’t have to be watching the discussion like a hawk, but they shouldn’t be ignoring it either. Keeping a mindful eye on student attitudes can prevent controversial topics from creating tension or fights that will ruin thoughtful discussion and potentially hurt people’s feelings.

The last part a professor can play in class debates is the teacher. This one seems fairly explanatory, as it is the professor’s job to teach, however, I mean beyond just giving out the lesson plan. During debates, the professor becomes an expert resource to consult if the need arises. If there’s a point where the students need clarification, the group can decide whether or not to call on the teacher to help them understand. They can choose if they want to truly gain a more in-depth explanation of a concept they are wrestling with or if they feel that they have covered it sufficiently. If the professor is called on to intercede, then they can happily clarify the issue. If they are not called to intercede, the professor should respect that decision unless it would be detrimental to student comprehension. The only time a professor should explain something without an invitation is if students have misinterpreted something or have missed a vital component of the concept. The remaining times that a professor should step in as a teacher are if the topic of discussion has gotten horribly offbase. At that point, there is no productive learning occurring and it is well within the professor’s right to course correct the wayward conversation onto something more appropriate.

In each of these roles lies the few times that a professor should intervene in student discussion. Outside of these specific cases, a professor should let the students discuss and explore concepts together. As young adults, we don’t need our hands held, and a professor doesn’t need to hover like a nervous parent. Professors should let student debates, for the most part, remain student debates and recognize that they don’t have to be overly involved, merely an active presence that occasionally intervenes.

]]>http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/10/09/the-appropriate-response-when-should-professors-involve-themselves-in-student-debates/feed/02668Beloit College’s Environmental Justice and Citizenship major has yet to reach its full potentialhttp://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/10/04/beloit-colleges-environmental-justice-and-citizenship-major-has-yet-to-reach-its-full-potential/
http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/10/04/beloit-colleges-environmental-justice-and-citizenship-major-has-yet-to-reach-its-full-potential/#respondThu, 04 Oct 2018 23:13:06 +0000http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/?p=2640I declared a major in the Justice and Citizenship track of Beloit College’s Environmental Studies program a few weeks before the end of my freshman year, and then I packed up my trail mix and left campus for the summer.

Sometime between then and when I arrived home, I adopted the major’s common shorthand “Environmental Justice” in the hopes that it would make it easier to explain, and that it would make such a noble-sounding cause easier to flaunt whenever folks back in Idaho asked what I’d been up to.

It didn’t work: I learned that adults of all backgrounds had never heard of the phrase “Environmental Justice” before. I was often asked if I was on a pre-law track; someone once asked me whether I was planning to become a “cop.” I would explain that the Environmental Studies: Justice and Citizenship major was more like an environmental humanities or social justice program, and then I’d throw in a little something about environmental racism.

The following March, I realized that I couldn’t define Environmental Justice, either, at least not outside of the context of Beloit. I was being interviewed for a summer internship with Greenaction for Health and Environmental Justice, a San Francisco-based grassroots nonprofit which was founded in 1997 by urban, rural and Indigenous community leaders, and which I’d found by Googling “Environmental Justice” plus “summer internships.”

During my interview, I found myself faltering in my confidence about what I was studying when I was asked for the first time ever what day-to-day Environmental Justice work might look like. I got the internship anyway (“she’ll learn,” one Greenaction employee later told me she said after we hung up that day and she looked up the Environmental Justice curriculum on Beloit’s website), and I was fortunate enough to spend 10 weeks of my summer on the ground there with the support of a Liberal Arts in Practice grant.

I was chiefly involved with Greenaction’s work in Bayview Hunters Point, a predominantly Black and low-income neighborhood in San Francisco situated adjacent to the former Hunters Point Naval Shipyard, a Superfund site heavily contaminated with toxic and radioactive waste. Through BVHP community members and my mentors at Greenaction, I learned more about the intricacies of advocacy and was introduced to the 1991 Principles of Environmental Justice (available on EJnet’s website), which are held sacred by organizations like Greenaction.

When my time was up, I was quite sure that the definition and depth of understanding of Environmental Justice that I’d gained at Greenaction wasn’t available to me at Beloit – not in an “experiential learning is crucial” kind of way, which this school has certainly taught me; but instead in an “I believe I could have graduated without understanding that ‘Environmental Justice’ describes a decades-old movement and isn’t just a buzzword” kind of way.

It’s not because of some kind of malice. Dr. Pablo Toral, the chair of Beloit’s Environmental Studies Program, told me recently that the program developed gradually: it was created in the mid-aughts by a student who was completing an honors term, after a number of other students began to feel that something was missing. Later, the major was narrowed down into two tracks: “Justice and Citizenship” and “Communication and Arts,” again based on student interest at the time.

Professor Toral continues to tailor his classes based on what his students want to learn; he recently began covering environmental racism in an environmental politics course that he teaches. And there’s a summer course on applied field research methods in Environmental Justice, also taught by Professor Toral, in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness in Minnesota.

I’d love to see research methods courses like that one and internships like the one I found with Greenaction become increasingly available and accessible to students in my major, and to eventually see some iteration of them become requirements. I want to encourage the program to continue its admirable practice of prioritizing student interest, and now to express my own interest in classes or units on the history and principles of the Environmental Justice movement.

Bradley Angel, the co-founder and executive director of Greenaction, told me this summer that he hopes universities trying to incorporate Environmental Justice into their curriculum “don’t just read academic treatises,” but also consult with local organizations; and that they make the content of their courses relevant to their geographic region as well as to broader issues. I have confidence in the Environmental Studies faculty and my peers in the program, and Bradley’s hopes are well within reach.

I don’t want anyone who shares my major to graduate without understanding, for example, that no Environmental Justice organization can properly operate without some employees who are part of and live in communities directly harmed by environmental racism. I’m looking forward to working within my program to help it reach its extraordinary potential.

]]>http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/10/04/beloit-colleges-environmental-justice-and-citizenship-major-has-yet-to-reach-its-full-potential/feed/02640U.S. Open highlights the poor treatment of Serena Williamshttp://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/10/03/u-s-open-highlights-the-poor-treatment-of-serena-williams/
http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/10/03/u-s-open-highlights-the-poor-treatment-of-serena-williams/#respondThu, 04 Oct 2018 00:44:44 +0000http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/?p=2630In Tennis’ U.S. Open Women’s Final, tennis superstar Serena Williams got into a heated disagreement with a referee, Carlos Ramos, after he accused her of cheating. The ref saw Williams’s coach, Patrick Mouratoglou, making a hand gesture, with his hands six inches apart moving in the apparent direction he wanted Williams to go.

The ref saw this and issued a code violation for cheating. Williams, however, has been very outspoken about her resistance to coaching, even when it is allowed. She protested the call saying that she was not cheating and interpreted Mouratoglou’s gesture as an encouragement, saying that to them that meant something along the lines of “keep it up.”

Mouratoglou later admitted that he was coaching. However, Ramos could have easily issued an informal warning to Williams instead of the formal first code violation. During the next changeover, Williams and Ramos had a civil conversation where she said she would not ever cheat and hadn’t, and he replied, “I know that.” Because Ramos said that, Williams likely interpreted that he would rescind his earlier call, which is highly unusual, and continued along.

In the second set, Williams made a key mistake and reacted by throwing her racket onto the court, destroying it. Throwing a racket is an automatic code violation and after a second violation, this results in a loss of a point. Williams initially did not understand that she had lost a point, likely because she thought the ref had overturned the call, but then reacted strongly. She demanded an apology from Ramos for the cheating call. Williams grows increasingly agitated with him and eventually calls him a thief for stealing the point from her.

After this, Ramos issued the third code violation for verbal abuse. Ramos indicated that by calling him thief, Williams was verbally abusing him. The third code violation resulted in a loss of a game for Williams, if she had gotten a fourth it would have ended the match.

Many have reacted with anger towards Williams, saying she ruined the win for Naomi Osaka and was cheating. However, we have seen many examples throughout the history of tennis where men have reacted with even worse language and violence towards referees and have not been issued code violations like Williams. John McEnroe was well known for his temper tantrums on court, but was met with laughter rather than anger from fans and the public. When men freak out it is “just one of those days” or met with people saying “you know how men are.” When women get angry it is “unusual” and a “temper tantrum.” This only adds to the rhetoric of women not being allowed to express anger when men can. McEnroe obviously was given code violations, but for far more severe language and with much more violence involved. The double standard here is enormous.

Williams is also a black woman in a predominantly white sport. Her anger being taken more threateningly than other white tennis players only further highlights racism in the sport. Williams should be able to call out referees and get upset without having scared white people try and punish her for her emotions.

In early July of this year, the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency was found to have drug tested Williams five times at that point while they had only tested her counterparts half as much. This is also more than the top five men’s players.

Williams has been tested more than everyone else because officials simply cannot believe that a black woman is as good as Williams is. They keep trying to find some other explanation for how she has had so much success, even after a complicated pregnancy, and cannot reconcile the fact that she has worked incredibly hard and is simply that good on her own.

The media coverage of this event in the weeks following has been atrocious. Most notably, The Herald Sun produced a cartoon from Mark Knight which depicted Williams in Jim-Crow like fashion. Williams is drawn as brutish, large and angry while everyone else in the image is depicted as white and slender, even Naomi Osaka who is a person of color.

There are many many components that are wrong with this image, and they all serve the purpose of othering Serena Williams. She is drawn to be further away from everyone else, with her hair standing straight on end and muscles bulging. Her face is drawn in probably the most dehumanizing crying pout and she is jumping on top of her racket. Ramos is in the back with Osaka, asking her, “can’t you just let her win?” The depiction of Ramos looks almost like Mr. Rogers and Osaka is slight, white and blond-haired. This depiction white-washes Osaka and dehumanizes Williams. Rightly so, it has come under intense fire from other publications and from the public.

However, it is not the only publication which has attempted to other Williams, it is just the most obvious one. Many news stories used racist and sexist language along the lines of the “angry black woman” trope in an attempt to call out Williams for her behavior. This is unacceptable and yet unsurprising.

Williams was wronged after the U.S. Open. She was wronged by a referee who harshly issued citations for mild language and anger. She was wronged by The Herald Sun in their depiction of her. She was wronged by the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency. Most of all, she was and is being wronged by those who are using her actions as a way of distracting from the blatant discrimination all these agencies have used to try and undermine her abilities as an athlete. Williams deserves respect and to be recognized as simply being an amazing tennis player.

]]>http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/10/03/u-s-open-highlights-the-poor-treatment-of-serena-williams/feed/02630Elon Musk smoking weed on Joe Rogan podcast highlights inequalityhttp://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/10/02/2606/
http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/2018/10/02/2606/#respondWed, 03 Oct 2018 01:55:03 +0000http://beloitcollegeroundtable.com/?p=2606On Sept. 6, Joe Rogan’s podcast, “The Joe Rogan Experience,” aired featuring a surprising twist. Many have seen the pictures and videos of Rogan’s guest, Tesla CEO Elon Musk, smoking marijuana, drinking whiskey, and wielding a flamethrower. Quickly becoming the source of many memes, Musk’s weed-smoking escapade was quite hilarious to a majority of the American public. However, this behavior can’t be condoned, but not for the reasons one might think.

Tesla’s Code of Business Conduct and Ethics states that employees should report to work free from the influence of illegal drugs or alcohol. According to the policy, “the use of illegal drugs in the workplace will not be tolerated.” Although marijuana is legal in the state of California, it is still a federal crime.

Because Musk was appearing on a public forum as a notable figurehead of Tesla, he was representing the company. It clearly states that employees should report to work free from the influence of illegal drugs or alcohol. Ignoring the legal argument about marijuana, Musk still was drinking while on this podcast and representing Tesla.

Musk is just one example of rich upper-level employee taking advantage of a system which serves to punish the lower class while rewarding the rich. Many celebrities have rushed to Musk’s defense, and he has maintained his position within Tesla while other employees have been fired on far less evidence and with far fewer consequences on the company.

While Musk gets applauded by the public, lower level employees get a kick in the butt or a prison sentence. However, Musk’s actions were not without consequences; consequences that would only affect others.

On the day following the podcast airing, Tesla stock was down a high of 9%, ending the day 6% down. However, that’s not the only disastrous effect of Musk’s actions. He is allegedly also under investigation by the Air Force. Musk is also the CEO of SpaceX, an aerospace manufacturer that is a contractor for the U.S. Air Force. Smoking marijuana is strictly prohibited for anyone with government security clearance, which Musk has due to his position in SpaceX.

While these are direct consequences of Musk’s actions, it is likely not going to be him who feels any of the effects. If stock goes down too much and the company gets in dangerous waters, it won’t be Musk taking a pay hit to help the company. Lower-level employees will instead be fired or have their significantly smaller salaries take significant cuts. If SpaceX no longer works with the U.S. Air Force, Musk is still the CEO of Tesla and has significant business prospects outside of SpaceX and Tesla.

Ignoring arguments of legality, Musk’s actions are still damnable and have had significant effects on the companies and businesses he is a figurehead for. As someone in a position of power, he should have thought more about what exactly his actions mean for all the people who work for Tesla and SpaceX. This is just another example of how lower-class workers are punished while upper-class employees are lauded.